The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a telephone call with a Council officer. This is because it is unlikely an investigation by this office could add to the response already provided via the Council’s previous investigation of the matter.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains about a telephone call with a Council officer about parking permits. Mr X says the officer seemed unsure how to deal with his query and when he asked to speak to someone else the officer questioned why and ended the call saying Mr X had raised her anxiety. She then refused to accept his further calls. Mr X says the officer sounded intoxicated.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended) We do not start an investigation if we decide we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X complained to the Council about a telephone call with a Council officer as set out in paragraph 1, above. He complains the Council’s response to his complaint accuses him of being rude and difficult which is not the case.
The Council investigated. It said the officer’s line manager had been present during parts of the conversation. The line manager reported hearing nothing from the officer during the call which was unhelpful or obstructive.
The officer’s recollection of the phone conversation differed from Mr X’s. She reported that Mr X became rude and offensive towards her during the call. She said this caused her distress and she decided to terminate the call.
The Council says its policy states staff do not have to tolerate rude or offensive behaviour and it will terminate calls where this is the case.
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because it is unlikely that an investigation by this office would be able to add to the response the Council has already provided via its own investigation. The two parties clearly have differing recollections and accounts of the call. The available information has already been considered and I do not see that we would be able to reliably reconcile the differing accounts and reach a view on what is more likely to have happened during the call. I have no cause to doubt either party’s account.
Mr X says in his complaint to this office that the officer sounded intoxicated during the call. He did not raise this point in his complaint to the Council. For this reason I have not considered it. We only consider complaints about matters the Council has already had the opportunity to consider via its complaints procedure.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because it is unlikely an investigation by this office could add to the response the Council has already provided or reach a view on what is more likely to have happened during the phone call.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman